1. Welcome and Call to Order. D. Peterson called the meeting of the AAPT Executive Board to order, welcoming members and guests.

2. Approval of the Agenda. There were no additions or changes to the Agenda.

3. Approval of the October 2005 Minutes. Members noted corrections to be made to the Minutes. J. Nelson moved that the Minutes be approved as corrected. J. Roeder seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

4. Secretary’s Report. M.B. Monroe reported on the following items.

The Board did not consider any electronic motions since its meeting in October 2005.

During the Fall 2005 elections, Lila Adair was elected Vice President and Dwain Desbien was elected Member-At-Large representing two-year colleges. Chuck Robertson was elected to his third and last term as Treasurer. Their terms began at the close of the 2006 Winter meeting. Monroe welcomed the new members to the Board and thanked retiring members Chuck Stone and Jim Nelson for their service to AAPT.

Monroe distributed print copies of the committee assignments for Board members in 2006.

Monroe asked members to sign and return one copy of the 2006 Conflict of Interest form to her if they had not already done so.

5. Report from the Executive Officer. Khoury highlighted the following topics from his written report to the Board (Board Packet, EO Report).

During Council on January 23, Khoury will present a motion for a joint meeting with the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in February 2009. Such a motion will require the Council to consider flexibility in the dates for the Winter meeting that traditionally have been held in January. Khoury reviewed the staff-prepared list of additional sites for future meetings that would be presented to Council. The physics faculty at the University of Alberta, University of Minnesota, Gonzaga University, and American University (proposed for Summers 2008 or 2009) has serious interests in hosting an AAPT meeting.

All science-based societies have taken an interest in the public controversy regarding intelligent design. Some of the larger societies have hired professional help to help them prepare rebuttals to the intelligent design proponents. He expressed that the AAPT should become involved as a minor partner in this effort. Khoury therefore moved that AAPT Board authorize the Executive Officer to commit up to $5000 in order that AAPT could join with other science-based societies in responding to threats posed by the advocates of placing intelligent design in the classroom. K. Mamola seconded the motion.

In response to a question from Nelson, Khoury explained that he felt $5000 would be a reasonable contribution based on the amounts given by other organizations. The first organization contributed $100K. However, if he determines that the AAPT could be a credible partner for less, he will offer the smaller amount.

Stone asked if the symposium on topics of evolution and intelligent design planned for the AAAS meeting in St. Louis in February would have people representing both sides of the issue. The symposium will be jointly sponsored by the AAAS and AAPT. Stone suggested that the AAPT should volunteer money to support a forum at this meeting with representatives from both sides. Roeder expressed that such a debate would legitimize the topic of intelligent design and therefore did not agree with this suggestion. Heller expressed that scientists are trying to convey that intelligent design is not a science. He felt that AAPT should look at the issue from the teachers’ perspective. The question that AAPT should address is why intelligent design should not be taught in the classroom. Heller did not feel that any of the other science organizations would address this aspect.

D. Peterson called for a vote on the motion. The motion passed unanimously with the understanding that the money would be taken from the Klopsteg Fund.

The AAPT has a vacancy in its marketing coordinator position. Khoury explained that the staff was taking this opportunity to consider how to best carry out the objectives of the association’s marketing efforts.

The tentative date for the Departmental Chairs’ Conference has been set for June 9-11, 2006 to be held in College Park. This biannual event is jointly sponsored by the AAPT and APS. Some of the members of the steering committee have expressed an interest in discussions about the report from the National Academy of Science, “Rising Above the Gathering Storm”. However, an agenda had not been defined to date.

The Executive Office will host the orientation for new AAPT Board members on March 24, preceding the March 25-26 Spring meeting of the Board. Since an orientation was not held last year, members who have joined the Board during the last two years were urged to attend.

The Audit Committee will meet late on March 24 so that the auditors’ report will be ready for the Board meeting.

Since the PTEC meeting dates are the same as the dates for the Board meeting in March, Warren Hein will likely attend the PTEC meeting, representing AAPT.

6. President’s Report. D. Peterson distributed a copy of his “end of year” report to Board members prior to this meeting of the Board. He had no other items to report.

7. Report from the President Elect. Heller had no report at this time.

8. Vice President’s Report. Leff referred to his report included in the Board Packet.

Jocelyn Bell and Daniel Kleppner from MIT will be the plenary speakers at the Summer meeting in Syracuse. The APS is planning a tribute to Hans Bethe for its session at this meeting. Leff asked the Board to give him suggestions for future plenary speakers. He reminded the Board that poster sessions will be promoted at the Syracuse meeting. In addition the time for contributed paper sessions will be reduced, providing for10-minute papers (instead of 15-minute papers) per session.

The appointments to the Advanced Labs Task Force had been completed. They are:

1. Jeffrey Dunham (Middlebury College), Chair

2. Van D. Bistrow (University of Chicago)

3. Elizabeth George (Wittenberg University)

4. Darrel Preston (California State University)

5. Patricia Sparks (Harvey Mudd College)

6. Gerald Taylor (James Madison University)

7. David Van Baak (Calvin College)

The Board will hear a progress report in March.

9. Past President’s Report. Nelson reported that the Review Board had received annual reports from all area committees except the Committee on Laboratories. Members reviewed the reports and prepared responses. He distributed a folder containing the reports and reviews for perusal by Executive Board members. (See these Minutes, Item 34.)

10. Budget for 2006. C. Robertson said he had received positive reactions from Board members concerning Khoury’s written explanation of the budget. Chabay and Stone added that they also liked the graphs included in the financial report.

Robertson explained that the large jump in revenue was due to the sale of the Dodge Building. The long-term reserve had about $6.7million. However, he observed that the external market had shown problems within recent days. He reminded the Board that 3% of the long-term reserve would be moved to the Operating Fund. Additional money cannot be removed from this reserve without Board authorization.

R. Peterson said that Karen Johnston would attend the meeting of the Section Representatives to give a short report on the Board retreat. In addition, R. Peterson will report on the Board’s proposed changes to the AAPT Winter meetings.

Gibson had no report at this time.

12. Meetings Planning Committee. At the direction of the Board, D. Peterson prepared a proposal for the creation of a meetings planning committee, which included the charge and suggested membership. The charge defined the responsibility of the committee to be the long-term planning for all national AAPT meetings. The committee will bring recommendations to the Executive Board, AAPT staff, and AAPT Council regarding locations, dates, themes, topical conferences, co-sponsored meetings with other science organizations, and possible host arrangements for such meetings. The meetings planning committee will primarily focus on a window of 3-5 years beyond the current date. The Executive Board and Council will be informed of recommendations for this window and take action accordingly. Once recommendations have been acted upon, AAPT staff, the Executive Board, and the Programs Committee are to play the primary role in developing appropriate detail for each meeting. The meetings planning committee will normally meet twice a year at national meetings and will be in electronic communication throughout the year. In addition, one or more meetings of the meetings planning committee per year at the ACP may be appropriate so as to properly focus on the current “meeting window” apart from the hassles of a national meeting.

The proposed membership defined a membership with some longevity in order to plan effectively for the 3-5 year window and to properly evaluate their initiatives. All are voting members, and all are ex officio except the key Chair position.

(1) Chair. The Chair is responsible for the meetings planning committee (MPC)

keeping up with its charge for the current 3-5 year window. The Chair will bring a written and oral report to the Executive Board (covering committee window plans, future recommendations, and deliberations) twice per year at national meetings. In addition the committee Chair will bring reports to Council and “Programs I” at each of their meetings. The Chair must have previous experience with planning national AAPT meetings and will be appointed and evaluated by the Executive Board. The Chair is appointed for a three-year term (once renewable) under a contractual agreement with the AAPT. The travel expenses of the committee Chair to two national meetings per year (and travel to ACP as needed) are to be covered by the AAPT.

(2) AAPT Associate Executive Officer

(3) AAPT Director of Meetings

(4) Vice Chair of Section Representatives

(5) Chair of Section Representatives

The AAPT Executive Officer would be welcomed as a participating guest at MPC meetings. In case of the absence of the Chair, the Associate Executive Officer will lead the MPC meetings.

D. Peterson explained that he tried to make clear distinctions between the meetings planning committee and the Programs Committee. He expressed that the chair is key to the committee membership and he emphasized that it was important to have longevity on the committee. The Associate Executive Officer would be subject to the vision of the Executive Officer Designate and the two Section Representative members would have four-year terms.

D. Peterson moved that the AAPT Executive Board approve the Meetings Planning Committee Charge and Committee Membership as described. Khoury seconded the motion.

Chabay advised that it would be important to select members who have been spark plugs in the area committees. She suggested that the Nominating Committee could appoint the MPC Chair. D. Peterson disagreed, saying that the Nominating Committee would not have the best information to choose members for the committee. Heller contended that sections are not really part of the AAPT since some of the local members are not national members. Roeder expressed that there was a need for input from the sections. Chabay said that the committee needs people with new ideas, not people who will sustain what the AAPT is already doing. Tobochnik said he did not have a clear idea of what the committee would do. Nelson responded that the responsibility of the committee would be to get some new ideas to better serve AAPT members through its meetings. Heller said the committee would report and recommend. Chabay felt that the planning committee could write a proposal for a themed meeting or identify someone to write the proposal.

Robertson asked Carol Heimpel her opinion concerning the creation of a meetings planning committee. Heimpel replied that she liked the idea for the long-term planning but did not feel the committee should be involved with the short-term details.

Tobochnik reminded the Board that the Section Representatives had shot down the ideas emanating from the recent committee appointed to change the format of the AAPT Winter meetings. However, he believed that the proposed meetings planning committee would be a group to actually form a vision and maybe get funding for a topical conference. Hein expressed that while the Section Reps can have good ideas, sometimes they can be too critical.

To hear the recommendations from the PSRC Five-Year Review Committee (presenting the report were Patsy Ann Johnson, Chair, and Dan MacIsaac);

To hear the report from the Executive Officer Search Committee; and

To consider a proposal to establish a fund raising advisory committee.

14. Executive Session II (without the Executive Officer). During Executive Session II, the Board reviewed the Minutes from the Executive Sessions of the Board during its October 2005 meeting and considered the report from the officers (D. Peterson,Heller, Monroe, and Leff as guest) conducting the Annual Review of the Executive Officer in December 2005.

(At the end of Executive Session II, D. Peterson adjourned the first session of the Executive Board.)

15. Online Access to TPT Back Issues. Khoury referred to his recommendation and discussion regarding the addition of past issues of theTPT to the online platform (Board Packet Item IIH). In his written report Khoury explained that the staff had collected and organized the past issues of the TPT in anticipation of this online project. He also explained that the staff anticipated that the current publications budget would cover the costs of the project. The staff will report to the Board during its March meeting how the AAPT will recover the costs of this project.

Khoury moved that the AAPT Board authorize the staff to move ahead expeditiously to place back issues of The Physics Teacher on our online platform. The Board expects to follow the AJP model in which access to back issues is included in the annual subscription rate for the magazine. Leff seconded the motion.

During discussion of the motion, Khoury explained that he thinks this project will be significantly cheaper than the AJP project and he anticipates the project to be completed by the end of the year. Heller asked if at some point, the AAPT should consider making some issues available without subscription. Khoury responded that he had heard three ways that other organizations had made back issues available: (1) add a charge to the regular subscription; (2) at some point make back issues completely free;and (3) make the access to back issues a completely separate service with a separate fee. He added that 3-4 articles of current issues are available now free of charge. The abstracts are accessible and searchable free of charge.

Chabay pointed out that while university faculty have access to these through institutional subscriptions, high school teachers don’t have this access. Hein said the AAPT staff have been talking to AIP about ways to improve marketing to two-year colleges and high schools by extending consortia agreements to these.

The motion passed unanimously.

16. ComPADRE Update. D. Peterson reported that the ComPADRE proposal submitted last year was funded for four years. Hein referred the Board to the report fromBruce Mason, AAPT Online Editor and Principal Investigator for ComPADRE in theBoard Packet (IIIA).

The funding term began October 1. This project term will focus on four primary points:

Introductory Undergraduate Physics Collection,

Upper Division Physics and Astronomy Collections,

Workshop and Conference Services, and

Evaluation

The project will identify an editor for the undergraduate physics collection and will identify one editor for the upper division physics courses and an editor for the upper division astronomy courses. Other collections will have sub editors. During the meeting of the Publications Committee, the members discussed how ComPADRE could report conference proceedings and participants, along with providing online registration and other conference services.

In additional activities since August 2005, ComPADRE was used to create an assistance bulletin board in September to help displaced physics teachers following the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. Bob Beichneris adding materials to the PER-Central Collection and PhysTEC is paying for the PTEC collection, which was created on the development server.

Matt Riggsbee was hired as a web developer, replacing ThadLurie. A half-time project manager,Caroline Hall, is working with Bruce Mason at Oklahoma University. In addition, since the AAPT will be hiring aperson to fill a vacancy in marketing, ComPADRE is working with the AAPT toidentify a person that would serve the needs of the project and theassociation. The original ComPADREproject developed sample sites. Thesesites need to have substantial information if they are to be attractive tousers. Therefore marketing is needed tohelp build these sites. While theproject provides some materials, the project also gathers materials for thesesites. Marketing impacts bothactivities. AAPT is the fiduciaryorganization for ComPADRE.

Jack Hehn, CoPI for AIP, congratulated AAPT on leading thiseffort. The NSF recognized this effortand has sold it as model to others. Hehnalso described the project as being about community building.

17. Jim Stith. J. Stith, AIP Vice President of PhysicsResources, expressed greetings to the Executive Board from the AIP andcongratulated the association on its programs in place as it celebrates its 75thanniversary. AIP is also celebrating its75th anniversary this year. Special commemorative activities will be held May 3 at the Cosmos Clubin downtown Washington DC. Community leaders and policy makers will beinvited to attend the special AIP event.

2005 was a good year for AIP as the Institute ended the yearabout $ 2M in the black. They hadanticipated difficulties in meeting their budget for the year. AIP had underestimated the income fromconsortia. Stith said that Chinais now paying for journal subscriptions.

The AIP program, Discoveriesand Breakthroughs Inside Science, is stronger than before, The program,under the guidance of a new distribution company, now has 60 televisionstations and AIP anticipates that it will have 100 stations by the end of2006. There are 16 partners helping toprovide financial support for DBIS, with three contributing above $ 30K ayear. The program prepares 144 DBISpieces for television a year. Stithwould like to turn these into education pieces but AIP cannot afford to do thatat the moment. He also explained thatAIP owns the copyrights to the materials but the subscribing television stationshave exclusive broadcasting rights for six months.

The AIP is working with the AAAS to collect data that willhelp the science community intelligently respond to those advocating theteaching of intelligent design in classrooms.

The January issue of PhysicsToday will be a tribute to Ben Franklin.

Robertson asked about the status of the education budget atAIP. Stith explained that publishingservices makes the money for the Institute. There is some concern that the loss in Russian translations could resultin a reduction in the education budget. Stith added that the AIP raised $ 3M for the History Center but has found fund raisingto be a struggle for the Physics Olympiad.

Jack Hehn, AIP Education Director, thanked the AAPT for itscontinued relations with the Society for Physics Students, specificallymentioning the SPS reception and paper sessions held at each national meetingof the AAPT.

18. Report from theSenior Staff Physicist. The missionof the Senior Staff Physicist (SSP) is to develop AAPT activities useful andattractive to college and university physics teachers. These activities target three goals: (1) energizing existing members to be more activein AAPT; (2) attracting new, young members and developing their potential to befuture leaders in the AAPT; and (3) gaining wider recognition of the AAPT’sleadership in physics education.

Holbrow described the status of three activities he isdeveloping, one for each goal:

A topical conference on teaching general relativity to undergraduates for college and university teachers of intermediate and advanced undergraduate physics;

A workshop organized by and for physics graduate teaching assistants;

A conference on achieving systemic change in physics teaching at large universities for physicists in leading R1 universities.

Holbrow designed each activity to appeal to a group ofphysics teachers whose involvement will help the association achieve itsgoal.

Holbrow has completed the first draft model for the R1conference, which he described as being the hardest to bring to fruition. The conference will be held at the ACP June 2-4, 2006. Physics departments at some leading researchuniversities have introduced important changes in how they teach physics. The conference will bring these successstories to the attention of other R1 physics departments. The conference will emphasize strategies andbest practices for achieving systemic change in large physics departments in astrong research environment. Teams oftwo or three people from each of the 25 leading R1 universities will be invitedto attend. Each team will be encouragedto include an administrator interested in implementing change in physicsinstruction at their home institution.

Holbrow has drafted a prospectus for the conference and theappointment of the organizing committee is almost complete. It is his hope that some of the committeemembers will agree to serve on an advisory panel to the AAPT. The panel will advise the AAPT on issuesrelating to how the association can better serve the R1 physics community.

Holbrow described the preparation for the teaching assistant(TA) conference as the most exciting activity. Pairs of TAs (a senior TA and a junior TA from the same institution) inthe Boston area were invited toattend an organizing meeting held January 9. Within the first half hour, cohesion had developed and the initialenergy among the participants was good. He is now referring to this as the Physics TA Forum. D. Peterson characterized this effort ashaving a unique approach – the TAs are meeting together to organize theforum. Holbrow commented that if thiseffort were successful the TAs would necessarily need to take ownership ofthis. The TAs have already set up aWicki website. The forum will have foursessions that will address how TAs help students learn physics, how they teachphysics, and how their position as TAs will prepare them to be physicists. The forum will be held during the joint meetingof the New England Sections of APS and AAPT at Boston University, April 1. In addition to the six universities in the Bostonarea, Holbrow will invite TAs from Yale University, Brown University, and the Universities ofConnecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Vermont,and Maine. He explained that his intent at the presenttime is to target the TA audience at the regional level.

Stith expressed that there is some tendency amonguniversities to require TAs to teach as one component of their fellowshipaward. Holbrow said that TA responsibilitiesvary widely across the universities in our country. Chabay added that some colleges are requiringtheir TAs to take physics education courses. She felt that some of these students should be invited toparticipate. Holbrow replied that theTAs in the Boston area would notview her suggestion as relevant to them because their universities do not havethis type of program. In addition hisintent was to avoid bringing TAs into a room where they might get the feelingthat someone was standing in front of them telling them how to do their job.

Holbrow has completed the appointment of the organizingcommittee for the teaching general relativity to undergraduate’sconference. Holbrow reported that theplanning for the general relativity conference is going well. The conference will have a mixture of shortpresentations with a lot of breakout sessions and opportunities forparticipants to consider the problems of teaching general relativity at theundergraduate level. Holbrow describedthree model syllabi he envisions emerging from the conference. Initial reactions from 25 leading collegessurveyed indicate eagerness among their faculty to attend the conference. Peter Saulson has obtained $ 5000 from LIGOto support the workshops. Holbrow islooking for a source for another $5000.

Holbrow explained that this meeting will be a model forother conferences. Therefore he wasworking with Bruce Mason at ComPADRE and Rob Headrick, AAPT Director ofPublications, to develop an online site for the conference and to define whatneeds to be published online. Theconference will need to have a product with an intellectual value.

A new SSP initiative addresses graduate education. Holbrowexplained that he was disappointed in the report from the Joint APS-AAPT TaskForce on Graduate Education and therefore he prepared an analysis of the reportsuggesting efforts that the AAPT could undertake in this area. Holbrow described graduate education as arich field of opportunity. He will talkwith the area committee on graduate education concerning how they could becomemore active.

Holbrow asked the Board to consider if possibly some topicalconferences should not be held in tandem with AAPT meetings. He believes that the two days of workshopsbetween the general relativity conference and the AAPT Summer meeting will bedead time for participants.

Holbrow advised that the AAPT urgently needs a definedprocess for putting things on the web. Currently the AAPT does not have a forceful presence on the web. He added that each of his efforts as SSPcould be strongly improved by a good web presence. For example he said that in his efforts toorganize a session at the AAPT Syracuse meeting that will celebrate the 50thanniversary of the PSSC; he had solicited articles from creators and users ofPSSC. These are to be published on the web by the AAPT, but the AAPT needsprocedures, formats, and web site designs to do this. Holbrow has had thesediscussions with Rob Headrick, Director of Publications. He also stated that we need area committeesthat are able to develop ideas for attractive websites.

Robertson commented that Holbrow is doing far more that whatRobertson had envisioned for the SSP. Hestated that it really behooves the Board to designate Holbrow’s request for animproved web presence as a high priority item to be accomplished quickly.

Len Jossem expressed his appreciation to Holbrow. In connection with Holbrow’s remarksconcerning the need for AAPT to provide online support of its conferences,Jossem reported that this past Summer India hosted a conference on physics andphysics education. The completeconference had been telecast. Heconcluded that we in AAPT have a few things to learn.

19. Retreat Planning. Karen Johnston, Retreat Facilitator,explained that her visit with the Board was threefold: (1) to report on the progress in planning theBoard retreat, scheduled for June 22-25, 2006; (2) to solicit advice; and (3) to request assistancefrom Board members in the next stage of planning.

1. Johnstondistributed copies of the one-page description of the retreat prepared with thehelp of the retreat planning committee since the Board’s last meeting inOctober. The description listed fourtopics anticipated for discussion during the retreat: (1) prioritizing andsequencing actions that will respond to trends in association membership,needed member services, and the broader physics teaching community; (2)developing synergy between national AAPT and AAPT Sections; (3) improvingAAPT’s visibility, viability, and influence in the physics and sciencecommunities; and (4) building partnerships with other professional associationsand government agencies (local and national) in ways that enhance AAPT’sstature in the professional community.

During the Anchoragemeeting, Johnston visited with thearea chairs and invited them to talk with her about the retreat over the nextmonth. She expressed that the areacommittees should have a voice at the retreat. By the end of the Winter meeting, she will have also visited with theSection Representatives and the Past Officers.

Johnston reported that the retreat planning committee had helped her produce a good listof potential guests. Heller will issuethe invitations to the guests and confirm if they will be able to attend.

2. Johnstonwill work with the staff to put together a briefing book for the retreat sothat everyone would understand the current status of the AAPT. She anticipatedthat the book would be online by May. She explained that retreat participants should arrive with accurateinformation in each of the areas to be discussed and the data should beavailable. She added that it was alsoimportant to clearly define the exit outcomes for the retreat and that thesewould be defined by the Board in March. The retreat outcomes will have to be built into the agenda if theretreat is to be successful.

Johnstondistributed a draft one-page description of all the activities at AAPT and theaudiences they impact. She will workwith the staff to complete this document. Johnston also distributed adraft report of AAPT membership and how it is parsed. She explained that it was hard to compilethis information since the association does not do a good job of monitoring itsactivities.

The Board agreed that such abriefing book should be prepared for the retreat. Johnstonasked Board members to recommend additional information that should be includedin this document. She added that theparticipants should have a suggested reading list in advance of the Juneretreat. She will prepare a tentativelist and send it to the Board for their reaction.

Although white papers weresuccessfully used at the 2000 retreat, D. Petersonrecommended that the decision touse white papers again at this year’s retreat be delayed until actualdiscussion questions were defined. Johnstonagreed that delaying this decision to the March Board meeting would provideample time to prepare 2-3 page white papers if they were used to jump startdiscussions. Chabay asked how the timewould be spent at the retreat. Johnstonexplained that she had not worked out the agenda but that likely there would bea mixture of large group and small group discussions.

3. Volunteers Roeder, Khoury, and Adair will workwith Johnston during February toprepare a set of questions addressing each of the four focus areas. Johnstonwill then refine and collapse these to produce a set of questions that will be“gap analyzed” by Hein, Tobochnik, Gibson, Nelson, and Stone. The final set of questions, completed by theMarch meeting of the Board, will constitute the discussion questions for theretreat.

At the March meeting of the Board, Johnston will report theset of discussion questions prepared by the Board members, will report feedbackthat she has received from the AAPT groups, and will provide more detailregarding the content of the retreat briefing book. Hein volunteered to begin the preparationsfor a retreat website. Johnstonadvised Board members in the interim to read the white papers from the 2000Retreat.

20. Executive Session 1 (with the Executive Officer). D. Peterson convened the Board into Executive Session I to hear the Five-YearReview report of The Physics Teacherpresented by the Committee Chair, Ed Neuenschwander.

(At the close of thediscussion of the review, D. Peterson reconvened the Board in open session.)

21. PhysTEC Report. Hein reported that the PhysTEC project wasabout midway through its fifth year of funding. However, due to the project’s late start, the leadership anticipatesthat there will be sufficient funds for a sixth year, no-cost extension andpartial funding for a no-cost extension in its seventh year. The project will likely submit a proposal tothe Fund for Improvement of Post Secondary Education (FIPSE) in the Spring tosubsidize PTEC.

Hein officially replaced John Layman as CoPI for the AAPT inDecember. Ted Hodapp is PI for the APS,which has fiscal responsibility for the project. The project encountered some difficultiesregarding the working relationship among the three collaborative organizations,APS, AIP, and AAPT. Hein reported thatthe delay in finalizing memorandums of understanding addressing these problemswas primarily due to the illnesses of Judy Franz (CE0, APS) and Jack Hehn, CoPIfor AIP.

Two consultants have joined the project. Marcia Fetters, Associate Professor andScience Educator at Western Michigan University, will serve asConsultant through this academic year. Her task is to report the strengths and challenges of the Teacher inResidence (TIR) component in relation to the project goals and the nationalscience education goals. Mary Fehrs,Professor Emeritus at Pacific University,joined the project as Associate Project Director for CoalitionDevelopment.

The PhysTEC Coalition (PTEC) has increased its membership to26 institutions, including the eight primary program institutions. PTEC will have its second annual conference March 24-26, 2006 at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville. PhysTEC has also initiated a new collectionin the ComPADRE project. Dan MacIsaacwill be the editor for the new digital library collection.

Mary Fehrs, known by most Board members due to her recentterm on the AAPT Board, expressed that she was excited about what she felt thatPhysTEC and the Coalition could do for physics education in our country. She invited the Board and other physicsfaculty to attend the PTEC meeting in March. In response to a question from the Board she explained that theCoalition is the component that will continue beyond the funding term of the PhysTECproject. She wants to see the Coalitionhoused within the AAPT and advised the Board to find a way to make thishappen. She added that the project wasfunded by APS because APS has more money.

Heller opined that the PTEC program appears to be a basicprogram. He expressed that more neededto be done beyond mentoring and induction. Ted Hodapp described the project and coalition as an opportunity tobring together people who have good teacher preparation programs. He explained that the representatives fromdifferent institutions help to address the different problems the facultyencounter.

Nelson commented on the growing shortfall of teachers in thecountry. While the good news is thatmore students are taking physics at the pre college level, the baby boomteachers are going to retire soon. Inaddition, only one-third of the physics teachers have what we consider to bethe qualifications to teach. Theuniversities on the average graduate one physics teacher per year. Hodapp agreed, saying that there are twoproblems to be addressed, quantity and quality.

D. Peterson asked Hodapp to describe his vision for PTEC andits position within the AAPT. Hodappdescribed PTEC as the way to go and said that AAPT has the teachers and thegreat pedagogy. Nelson expressed that hewould like to see an effort to connect PhysTEC with the PTRA program.

22. Bauder Fund. C. Robertson reported that the Bauder FundCommittee approved two proposals for a total of $1500 and denied oneproposal. The Fund currently has about$323 K. Next year, the interest from theendowment will be divided evenly, $5800 to the Fund and $5800 to the New JerseySection.

23. Venture Fund.Robertson reported that the AAPT Fund had given Ztek $ 50 K to put Cinema Classics into DVD formats. By the end of next year, the Fund will havereceived $43 K in back payment. Inaddition the Fund had loaned Powerful Ideas in Physical Science (PIPS) $30 K. The Fund has received $23 K in payback overthe last two years.

24. Membership andBenefits Committee. R. Petersonreported that the AAPT has 895 new members as a result of the membership driveto increase the number of AAPT members by 1000. He noted that the majority of the members gained as well as the majorityof members lost are high school teachers. The committee is considering how to stop the large churn inmembership.

The committee is considering how to improve the number ofinstitutional memberships. The committeewould like to continue producing videos of the plenary speakers at the AAPTnational meetings, if the technical problems affecting the quality of thevideos can be resolved. In addition, theAAPT will continue to offer 50% discounted membership rates to doctoralgraduate students who maintain their membership following graduation. Desbien suggested that the offer should beextended to students completing their master’s degree. R. Peterson also reported that some physicsdepartments that service engineering programs will be required to have ABETaccreditation. (ABET is the recognized accreditor for college and universityprograms in applied science, computing, engineering, and technology.) The M&B Committee is considering how thismight impact the physics education community.

25. PublicationsCommittee. Monroereported two motions from the Publications Committee.

The Committeerecommended the following appointments to the TPT Editorial Board:

·JamesHicks,Crystal Lake,Illinois,

·RandyKnight,CaliforniaPolytechnicStateUniversity,San Luis Obispo,and

·JohnMallinckrodt,CaliforniaPolytechnicStateUniversity,Pomona.

The motion from theCommittee passed unanimously.

The Committeerecommended that Roger Stuewer be reappointed for another three-year term asEditor of Resource Letters. Monroeexplained that she had not realized that Stuewer’s term as editor actuallyended January 2005 and consequently the action had not been brought to theCommittee’s attention at the appropriate time. Therefore she asked that the new three-year term include 2005 and endJanuary 2008. The motion passed unanimously.

Monroe reportedthat she anticipated that the Books Editor Search Committee would have arecommendation ready for the March Board meeting.

26. Physics FirstDocument. Gibson reported that thePhysics First document has been completed and will be sent to RobHeadrick. Monroeasked if the Publications Committee would consider the document. Khoury said the document had policyimplications and so the booklet will come straight to the Board with possibly asubset of the Board reviewing it. D. Peterson suggested that Khoury could be that subset. It was agreed that Khoury will do theeditorial review of the document and that Gibson and Adair will also provideinput. The Board’s action regarding thepublication of the physics first document will be handled electronically.

27. October MeetingDates. Following a short discussionof best meeting times, the dates for the Fall meeting of the Board werescheduled for October 28-29. TheInvestment Advisory Committee will meet all day Friday October 27 and theBudget Committee will meet Friday evening.

Tobochnik reminded the Board of its interest in visitingCapitol Hill in conjunction with its meetings at ACP in the Fall and Spring. Khoury explained that since this was the weekbefore elections, members of Congress would not be available.

28. Report on theAnchorageMeeting. The Board expressed its thanks to the AAPTstaff for a very good meeting. CarolHeimpel reported that the meeting had 596 participants, including about 100spouses and vendors. She added that shehad heard more good comments about the meeting and facilities than badcomments.

Khoury reported that there were very few people in theexhibit hall on Tuesday, explaining that this was not a healthy sign. During the luncheon with the vendors, DaveVernier stated that he saw the same people at both meetings and therefore itwas not worth it for him to continue coming to both the Summer and Wintermeetings. Khoury empathized withVernier, saying that Vernier needed to make a business decision while at thesame time Vernier felt guilty for pulling his company’s support from the AAPTWinter meeting. Another vendor had saidhe would not attend another meeting this small. Paul Stokstad, PASCO,suggested that AAPT might want to consider hosting apparatus exhibits in theSummer and books exhibits in the Winter. Heller expressed that the AAPT needs to have better meetings that wouldattract both members and vendors. Khouryreplied that the way to do this was to increase the attendance at meetings byselecting sites what would draw more people.

29. AIP EducationOfficer. D. Peterson explained thatin former years, the AIP Education Officer was invited to attend AAPT Boardmeetings and sit at the table with the Board members. Since Stith was present, Peterson asked himto speak to this agenda item.

Jim Stith described the relationship between AIP and AAPT asclose. Some of AAPT’s leaders had servedas AIP Education Officers. The firstEducation Officer was the Bill Kelly from Philadelphia,then Arnie Strassenberg, Lew Slack, and Don Kirwan. Kirwan was always in attendance at AAPT Boardmeetings and played a vital role in organizing AAPT activities. Stith expressed pleasure with therelationship between Hehn and Hein.

Khoury explained that the authorization of a standinginvitation to the AIP Education Officer to attend the AAPT Board meetings is apolicy issue. If issued, this could involve AIP money, but not AAPT money. While two of the four Board meetings aretypically held at the ACP, the other two are held at national meetings. However, the Education Officer normallyattends these meetings. Khoury expressedthat the APS might want a similar invitation since the AAPT also has a closerelationship with the society. Headvised the Board to be prepared for such a request. D. Peterson clarified that if the Boardissued a standing invitation to the AIP Education Officer, he/she would beexpected to attend the Board meetings and sit at the table. Khoury explained that such an invitationwould change the officer’s degree of involvement at AAPT Board meetings.

Hein reported on the anniversary activities developed by theAAPT staff.

About 50 members a week participate in the weekly trivia contests. Each week’s winner gets a T-shirt or something comparable. At the end of the month, a drawing is held among the weekly winners and the winner of this phase of the contest gets $75.

The time capsule will be on display in Syracuse and the capsule will then be brought back to the ACP and sealed.

Hein and Sina Kniseley are trying to finalize the booklet of “notable” physicists. A descriptor title for the physicists had not been selected. The staff had initially referred to the physicists as “outstanding”, but the Board had objected to this title. Heller explained that the title is important because there is concern that the selection was based solely on popularity.

D. Peterson asked about the progress regarding the series ofinterviews with previous AAPT Executive Officers proposed for publication inthe Announcer. Leff reported that he had not had recentcommunications from the group leading this effort (Karen Johnston, Howard Voss,Rod Grant, and John Layman).

Leff is arranging a session featuring a series ofpresentations by Oersted medalists. D. Peterson suggested that a web page advertising the speakers should be set up,either at the AAPT website or the Syracusewebsite. The Women in Physics areacommittee is planning a commemoration of past women presidents.

31. Report fromSection Representatives. R. Petersonreported that the Section Reps had been informed of the changes in the meetingformat to be implemented at Syracuse. Generally the new meeting format was favorablyreceived by the representatives.

However, R. Peterson explained that he and other SectionRepresentatives were not satisfied with the presentation of future meetingsites during the Council meeting. Therepresentatives were not given information about the sites prior to the meetingnor were they given appropriate information that could be used to criticallyconsider each proposed site. Questionsthat could not be addressed for many of the sites included the availability ofhotels and eating places near the location of the meeting and if the meetingsites could accommodate the new meeting formats. In addition, he recommended that both SectionReps and area chairs be involved in the development of new meeting models.

D. Peterson opined that generally the area chairs did nothave the experience to make decisions regarding meeting sites and should not bea part of the planning process. He addedthat the concerns expressed by the Section Reps are not new. However, the Board

is trying to address these in its thrust to improve ournational meetings.

32. PER TopicalGroup. According to the criteriaestablishing the PER topical group (PERTG), the group could conduct electionsonce they had received 100 members. PERTG now has more than 100 members. Hein distributed copies of the announcement prepared by Stamatis Vokoscalling for nominations for six positions on the PER Leadership OrganizingCouncil (PERLOC). The call for nominations will be posted on the PERTGwebsite. Hein explained that the electionprocess had been delayed because the group could not determine how to publicizethe list of PERTG members, facilitating the nomination process. Khoury stated that this matter should notinvolve the Board or the AAPT staff; this is a matter for PERTG to resolve.

In addition, a $ 1000 scholarship from an anonymous donorwas given to Jonah Lynch (George Washington University).

The Lotze scholarship agreement allows for a fifth member ofthe committee. Therefore the committeerecommended that the Chair of the Committee for Teacher Preparation beappointed to the scholarship committee. The other members of the committee are the Chair appointed to athree-year term by the President Elect and typically the high school andfour-year college At-Large Members of the Board. Ex officio members include the Treasurer, theExecutive Officer and Barbara Lotze.

34. Review Board. Nelson reported that he had not received anynegative comments from Board members regarding the Board’s reviews of theannual reports of the area committees. Therefore these reviews will be mailed to appropriate committees andwill be published in the Announcer. Nelson reported that he had talked with C.Haas, Chair of the Committee for Laboratories. Serious medical problems prevented her from submitting the committee’sreport and even from attending the meeting in Anchorage. Therefore Nelson asked Puskar to stand in forHaas at the meeting of the area committee. Nelson will prepare a short report on behalf of the committee.

35. Awards Committee. Nelson reported that the committee selectedthe recipients for the four AAPT awards given in the Summer. Lisa Randall has accepted the KlopstegAward. Nelson will notify the recipientsof the Millikan Award and the two Teaching Excellence Awards.

Nelson distributed a proposal to change the wording of thecriteria for the two Teaching Excellence Awards. The current criteria require that therecipients be active teachers at the time of the awards. However, Nelson explained that the committeehas received nominations for people deserving of the awards, but who no longerteach. Therefore he asked the Board tothink about changing the wording of the criteria to expand the list ofappropriate nominees.